Latest news with #AdmiralNelson
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- General
- Daily Mail
Homeowners at war with council over 45ft high 'Jack and the Beanstalk' oak tree as bosses refuse demands to cut it down despite fears it's a 'danger to life'
Homeowners living on a historic road are in a row with the council over a 'Jack and the Beanstalk' oak tree they say is a danger to them. Residents living in the terraced properties in Winchester are surrounded by the 45 foot high tree and have branded the decision to issue a preservation order as 'grotesquely irresponsible'. They claim the oak - which is still relatively young and grew six feet last year - was planted around 50 years ago by a previous resident who thought it was a 'good idea at the time'. But it has continued to rapidly grow to the point that it is now 'out of proportion' to the surrounding properties and totally dominates the small garden it sits in. The current homeowners Orla Williams, 40, and her partner moved into the terraced Grade II Listed home on Canon Street two years ago and applied to have the tree felled. However, the Winchester County Council put a preliminary protection order on it and cited that it was 'appreciated' by the residents on a neighbouring street. The decision has been slammed by neighbours - who live on one of Winchester's 'most prestigious roads' - who said that they are not the ones who will be forced to deal with the repercussions if it were to topple over. The street, where the average house price is more than £600,000, is just yards from Kingsgate Street, and was where Admiral Nelson's mistress Lady Hamilton once lived. The doctor said that after moving in, she was approached by several neighbours who raised concerns about the tree. The mother-of-two said: 'They were concerned that it is getting very large and that it could cause damage to their properties and potentially harm to people if it gets any larger, so they wanted it to be taken down. 'We applied to the council to have it removed and someone came to look at it. '[The tree officer] said that they want to put a tree protection order on it.' The homeowner said that an 'awful lot of detritus' falls from the oak in the autumn and winter, and she is concerned about the droppings which fall down from wildlife like pigeons and squirrels. She added: 'We appreciate that the tree is beautiful but it's the wrong tree in the wrong place. 'It is quite sad to remove something like that but it is only going to get bigger and potentially cause damage to lots of properties which is the main concern. 'The council said they were concerned about removing it because it's one of the only trees in the area. 'All of the local residents seem to be of the opinion that unfortunately, it's the wrong tree in the wrong place.' According to a council report, the tree officer visited Ms Williams' address after receiving notice from the couple that it was due to be felled. After visiting, he found that that tree met the criteria for a provisional protection order, which was issued in February of this year. A Winchester County Council meeting will take place next week to confirm whether or not the order will remain in place. In total nine residents objected to the order. They all live in the centre of the cathedral city on roads which sit just yards away from Winchester College - the country's oldest public school and Rishi Sunak's alma mater. Mark Pocock, a retired resident living on Canon Street, branded the council's decision to protect the tree as 'ludicrous'. 'As trees grow older they become more brittle,' he said. 'If it were to fall and damage properties or persons, I would say the responsibility would be entirely with the council - not the owners of those properties. 'I think putting a tree protection order on is grotesquely irresponsible of the council. 'It could be a danger to property and life.' Nick Goff, 80, moved into his property on the road adjacent to Canon Street just over a year ago. The retired British Airways pilot said he is worried that if the tree continues to go, the roots underneath will damage a medieval wall in his garden, which was built in the Tudor era. Mr Goff said: 'The issue is that in 10 years' time, that will be double the height and double the width. 'It put on six feet last year it it's going to put on another six feet this year.' The homeowner commissioned an independent report from a tree consultancy business who found the oak is still a 'teenager'. The report found that while the tree is in 'good physiological condition', it is 'a large sized tree in a very small area' and so the tree protection order is 'unjustified'. It also said that 'the possibility of longer term damage to the retaining walls and footings of the adjacent properties as entirely foreseeable'. 'Some guy planted this as something to do 40 years ago,' Mr Goff continued. 'Now, we have got Jack and the Beanstalk. It's not a historic tree, it's a silly mistake.' The council report issued ahead of next week's meeting stated that the tree officer believed the concerns raised over the tree were 'speculative'. It said that while it is 'not historic', the tree 'contributes meaningfully to local biodiversity and visual amenity'. The report also stated that it is 'clearly visible' from residents living on a neighbouring private road, where it is 'appreciated'. It added: 'It is also the last significant tree in an area of land between Canon Street and St Swithun's Street, enhancing the character of the conservation area.' Retired resident Graham Rule, 62, said the decision by the local authority was 'irresponsible'. He said: 'We all love trees but that shouldn't be there. 'The people who want the protection order, they don't live here - its totally irresponsible.' Mr Rule said the tree was planted in the early 70s by a former resident. He added: 'Like a lot of things, it seemed like a good idea at the time. 'I'm a huge fan of trees but at the end of the day that tree shouldn't be there.' The conclusion of the tree officer's report stated that if the provisional TPO is not confirmed at the council meeting, it will be 'left vulnerable to being removed'. The report added: 'The removal of this tree will have a detrimental impact on the biodiversity and also character of the conservation area.'
The Sun
17-05-2025
- Business
- The Sun
Historic seaside town named cheapest place to live in Kent with award-winning pub and very famous ex-local
A HISTORIC seaside town has been named the cheapest place to live in Kent. Queenborough, on the Isle of Sheppey, is the cheapest place to buy a home in Kent, according to new data. 3 3 Homes in the ME11 postcode area sold for an average of £224,167 each over the last 12 months to the end of February. This average is less than any other postcode in the county with at least 20 sales over the past year. The figures, which were released by the Land Registry, show that the lowest house prices in Kent include Queenborough and Rushenden. The town of Queenborough is located just two miles from Sheerness and is known for its rich history. In the town, visitors will find numerous heritage buildings and a small church, which was built at the end of the 14th century. The harbour is home to a number of fishing boats where a small market takes place every second Saturday from 10am to 3pm, during the summer season. The town even has a micropub in the town called The Admiral's Arm. The award-winning pub even has a tapas restaurant next door, although you can also order a pizza there. This was likely named after Admiral Lord Nelson who was rumoured to have learned many of his sailing skills nearby. He also lived in Queenborough with his mistress Lady Hamilton. Inside the stunning Gold Caravan at Haven Kent Coast including ensuite bathroom and walk-in wardrobe It is also home to Queenborough Castle, built during the Hundred Years' War in the 1300s. It was thought to have inspired Henry VII's Deal Castle and Walmer Castle. Dover follows behind Queensborough, with houses selling for £234,660 in average in the CT17 postcode. Westgate-on-sea (CT8) followed with homes selling for £263,493 on average and then Chatham (ME4) was next, with the average home selling for £269,836. Houses in Ramsgate (CT11) cost slightly more with the average home selling for £276,858. The are of Riverhead had the highest average sale price across Kent, with the average home selling for £869,163 in the TN13 postcode area. Other expensive areas in Kent included Langton Green, Penshurst, Cudham and Orpington. Last year, Sevenoaks topped the Times' best places to live in south east England listing and was noted for being a great spot for commuters heading into the capital. Also in Kent, a 'Royal' English town with one of the UK's fanciest Wetherspoons, was named as one of the top places to live in the UK. Plus, the trendy English town home to 'national treasure' beach lido is crowned BEST seaside spot to move to in UK. 3 House prices in Kent All the postcode areas in Kent: ME11 (Queenborough): £224,167 CT17 (Dover): £234,660 CT8 (Westgate-on-sea): £263,493 ME4 (Chatham): £269,836 CT11 (Ramsgate): £276,858 ME12 (Isle Of Sheppey): £288,588 CT12 (Minster): £294,374 CT16 (Dover): £295,335 ME7 (Gillingham): £296,56 CT20 (Central Folkestone): £296,850 ME6 (Snodland): £299,676 DA9 (Greenhithe): £300,955 ME10 (Sittingbourne): £304,182 CT9 (Margate): £306,607 CT19 (Central Folkestone): £308,620 ME5 (Walderslade): £311,784 TN23 (Ashford): £315,347 DA11 (Gravesend): £319,971 TN24 (Ashford): £325,428 ME2 (Strood): £327,532 ME1 (Rochester): £328,146 CT7 (Birchington): £328,558 TN28 (New Romney): £331,912 TN29 (Lydd): £332,150 CT1 (Canterbury): £333,795 CT6 (Herne Bay): £340,325 DA10 (Swanscombe): £343,788 DA12 (Gravesend): £345,299 CT13 (Sandwich): £347,796 ME8 (Rainham): £348,199 ME15 (Bearsted): £356,296 ME16 (Barming): £356,401 CT14 (Deal): £362,162 DA1 (Dartford): £362,526 CT2 (Sturry): £366,492 ME13 (Faversham): £371,328 ME14 (Maidstone): £373,237 ME3 (Rochester): £385,072 ME9 (Sittingbourne): £388,518 ME20 (Aylesford): £390,796 DA4 (Dartford): £395,679 CT10 (Pysons Road Industrial Estate): £399,920 BR8 (Swanley): £401,929 TN9 (Tonbridge): £405,260 CT3 (Canterbury): £406,861 CT21 (Hythe): £411,331 CT18 (Hawkinge): £411,612 CT15 (Dover): £415,667 DA2 (Dartford): £421,353 TN25 (Challock): £452,184 ME17 (Hollingbourne): £452,224 TN12 (Paddock Wood): £456,992 CT5 (Whitstable): £466,243 TN27 (Headcorn): £480,248 TN1 (Royal Tunbridge Wells): £482,983 ME18 (Maidstone): £483,545 CT4 (Canterbury): £501,831 TN10 (Tonbridge): £502,411 TN8 (Edenbridge): £503,034 ME19 (West Malling): £503,335 TN26 (Bethersden): £503,336 TN30 (Tenterden): £505,565 DA3 (Longfield): £514,858 TN2 (Royal Tunbridge Wells): £528,456 TN16 (Biggin Hill): £535,635 TN4 (Rusthall): £543,046 DA13 (Meopham): £550,369 TN17 (Cranbrook): £551,471 TN18 (Hawkhurst): £554,042 DA5 (Bexley): £566,539 TN15 (Ightham): £581,205 BR6 (Orpington): £604,481 TN14 (Cudham): £635,825 TN11 (Penshurst): £642,976 TN3 (Langton Green): £742,464 TN13 (Riverhead): £869,163
